TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 953
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Since all these appeals are interconnected and raise common ground, these were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The respective grounds raised in all these appeals are to the effect that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition of :- (a) Shri Somabhai Ambalal Prajapati: For AY 2004-05 - Rs,1,66,666/- (1/3 rd out of cash flow) For AY 2005-06 - Rs.3,54,800/- (unaccounted sales) (b) Shri Chandulal Ambalal Prajapati: For AY 2004-05 - Rs.1,66,666/- (1/3 rd out of cash flow) (c) Shri Pankaj Somabhai Prajapati: For AY 2009-10 - Rs.18,81,429/- (out of Rs. 30 lakh) 3. The b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e appellant for the purchase of land in subsequent years. The AO had allowed the credit of the withdrawals of Rs. 20.50 Lacs made in the month of March, 2003 but did not allow the credit of the withdrawals of Rs. 5 Lacs made in the month of February 2003 on the ground that if the appellants had 5 lakh in their possession, then what was the need of making further withdrawals from the bank. The AO therefore presumed that the amount of Rs. 5 lakh withdrawn in the month of February 2003 was utilised by the appellants somewhere else. As against this the contention of the appellant is that the AO should have allowed the credit of the withdrawals of Rs. 5 lakh made in the month of February, 2003. In my opinion, in the absence of the original books....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....words, the addition of Rs. 166,666/- made by the AO in the hands of the each appellant is hereby confirmed." 3.3 In case of Somabhai for AY 2005-06 the addition qua the unaccounted sales were held to be net profit by ld. CIT(A) as all the expenses were already claimed by the assessee, by following observations: "5.1 It was admitted by the AR that as per the seized paper only unaccounted sales and not the unaccounted purchases were found recorded. This means that there was evidence of unaccounted sales but there is no evidence on record which shows that the appellant has also made unaccounted purchases. In case the evidence of unaccounted purchase and unaccounted sales is fund from the seized material, in that case, only the addition o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... for four months, the loan of Rs. 25 Lacs for three months, loan of Rs. 10 Lacs for three months, loan of Rs. 5 Lacs for three months, loan of Rs. 5 Lacs for three months and another loan of Rs. 10 Lacs for two months. In other words, if the interpretation of the AO is accepted to be correct, in that case the loan was given for total 18 months and therefore the investment should have been considered in two different assessment years and not in assessment year. This means, the appellant had given loans of Rs. 30 lakhs, Rs. 25 Lacs, Rs. 10 Lacs, Rs. 5 Lacs, Rs. 5 Lacs and Rs. 10 Lacs totaling Rs. 85 Lacs simultaneously. Instead of the figure of Rs. 30 lakhs, the AO should have adopted the figure of Rs. 85 Lacs. 6.2. Even if it is accepted ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s cash in hand on the point that when the assessee was having cash in hand, there would be no reason to withdraw the funds from the bank. Therefore, the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs was split into Rs. 1,66,666/- and disallowed in the hands of three brothers. 4.2 Apropos unaccounted sales it is contended that entire sales cannot be treated as net profit and the GP should be applied. Reliance is placed on following judgments of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court:- i) CIT vs. President Industries, (2002) 258 ITR 0654 (Guj.) ii) Pipush Kumar O. Desai vs. CIT, (2001) 247 ITR 0568 (Guj.) 5. Ld. DR relied on the orders of ld. CIT(A). It is contended that the findings of CIT(A) are pure finding of facts on the peculiar facts and circumstances o....